The present disclosure relates to bandages for wounds, and more particularly to bandages for use with a vacuum and/or irrigation source.
The prior art contemplates that chronic wounds may be treated by providing a vacuum in the space above the wound to promote healing. A number of prior art references teach the value of the vacuum bandage or the provision of vacuum in the space above the surface of a chronic wound.
A vacuum bandage is a bandage having a cover for sealing about the outer perimeter of the wound and under which a vacuum is established to act on the wound surface. Applying vacuum to the wound surface promotes healing of chronic wounds. Typically, suction tubes are provided for drawing exudate away from the wound and for creating vacuum under the cover. If the cover is a flexible cover, which is typically more comfortable for the patient, a porous packing may be provided under the cover to fill the space in which the vacuum is formed. It will be appreciated, however, that the packing will be omitted by many caregivers, and it may be preferable not to have packing. The following U.S. patents establish the nature of vacuum treatment bandages and devices: U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,095,992, 6,080,189, 6,071,304, 5,645,081, 5,636,643, 5,358,494, 5,298,015, 4,969,880, 4,655,754, 4,569,674, 4,382,441, and 4,112,947. All of such references are incorporated herein by reference for purposes of disclosing the nature of such vacuum treatment of wounds.
As shown, for example, in U.S. Pat No. 5,645,081 (hereinafter the '081 patent), a method of treating tissue damage is provided by applying negative pressure to a wound. The negative pressure is provided in sufficient duration and magnitude to promote tissue migration in order to facilitate the closure of the wound. FIG. 1 of the '081 patent discloses an open cell polyester foam section covering the wound, a flexible hollow tube inserted into the foam section at one end and attached to a vacuum pump at another end, an adhesive sheet overlying the foam section, and tubing to adhere to the skin surrounding the wound in order to form a seal that allows the creation of a vacuum when the suction pump is operating. The '081 patent further teaches use of negative pressure between about 0.1 and 0.99 atmospheres and that the pressure can be substantially continuous and is relieved only to change the dressing on the wound. Alternatively, the '081 patent teaches use of a cyclic application of pressure in alternating periods of application and non-application. In a preferred embodiment, pressure is applied in five-minute periods of application and non-application.
Various other prior art references teach the value of the vacuum bandage or the provision of vacuum to the surface of a chronic wound. Several Russian language articles exist which establish the efficacy of vacuum therapy in the 1980's. Examples of such prior art articles, each of which discusses the use of application of vacuum to a wound to promote healing, are as follows: “Vacuum therapy in the treatment of acute suppurative diseases of soft tissues and suppurative wounds”, Davydov, et al., Vestn, Khir., September 1988 (The September 1988 article); “Pathenogenic mechanism of the effect of vacuum therapy on the course of the wound process”, Davydov, et al. Khirurigiia, June 1990 (the June 1990 article); and “Vacuum therapy in the treatment of suppurative lactation mastitis”, Davydov, et al. Vestn. Khir., November 1986 (the November 1986 article).
The Russian articles distinguish wound drainage from use of vacuum therapy for healing. The Russian authors report that vacuum therapy resulted in faster cleansing of the wound and more rapid detoxification than with the traditional incision-drainage method. The November 1986 Russian article describes the vacuum therapy techniques as a reduction of 0.8-1 atmosphere for 20 minutes at the time of surgery, and subsequent 1.5 to 3 hour treatments at a reduced pressure of 0.1 to 0.15 from atmosphere, twice daily. These Russian articles teach the use of negative pressure to effect healing. The articles describe using several sessions per day, each lasting up to one hour, with a vacuum of 76-114 mmHg. The Russian articles teach using this vacuum method to decrease the number of microbes in the wound. The June 1990 Russian article teaches that this vacuum therapy provides a significant antibacterial effect. The article describes the stepped up inflow of blood to the zone around the wound to lead to an increase in the number of leukocytes reaching the focus of inflammation. Subsequent articles and patents further develop the benefits obtained with vacuum therapy.